Resources on Answering Atheism?

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

That really just makes it sound like a person should be concerned about the "saving" of others for some very selfish reasons. From my perspective (and yours may certainly vary) that is a really bad reason.

That comment seems to fit well within the parameters of fallen humanity.

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"Jer 17:9 KJV

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[Kevin H]

I

Quote:

t's possible that if you listen to what the other person is saying you may actually learn something as well. Spirituality is not so cut an dried.

Very well said, M.T. Why would anyone care what I have to say unless I care about what they are saying? I've learned (and unlearned) some amazing things just by listening to others. Frequently, I learn more from free-wheeling non-Christians or non-conventional Christians than I learn from those who are trapped in a single train of spiritual thought; and feel the need to pretend everything is always alright when it's not.

Indeed!

[Kevin H]

Thank you phkrause!

[Guest sweng]

Greetings All,

I am looking for some information on Atheism and how their arguments are countered by Christians and perhaps in this case by SDA apologists. By information its wide open, books, mp3 series, study guides etc.

There is plenty of good evidence out there.

You can start here. You have a very long road ahead, but it is full of treasures to strengthen your faith,

Someone wants us to know that it isn’t a joke that atheists might not exist.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intellige...ight-not-exist/

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intellige...books-with-him/

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/an-aristotelian-proof-of-the-existence-of-god/

[Guest sweng]

Why do you need to counter them or answer them? You believe what you believe

You need to be able to state what you believe, why you believe it, and what evidence you have to support your belief.

Sooner or later you will be asked.

Remember, only the Holy Spirit can convict.

[Guest sweng]

But other than ONE book - there is zero evidence. There is all told ZERO factual evidence.

Actually, there is a great deal of evidence for the existence of God and the historicity of the Bible.

Have you not heard of Christian Scientists.

They use the scientific method to verify their beliefs in the Bible.

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

Have you not heard of Christian Scientists.

They use the scientific method to verify their beliefs in the Bible.

And some would say that they are neither Christian nor scientific.

Here is what they say about the Bible:

Quote:

. . . the manifold mistakes in the ancient versions, the thirty thousand different readings in the Old Testament, and the three hundred thousand in the New. . .

Here is what is said as to the basis of CS, which is NOT the scientific method:

Quote:

The fundamental propositions of divine metaphysics are summarized in the four following, to me, self-evident propositions. . . 1. God is All-in all. 2. God is good. Good is Mind. 3. God, Spirit, being all, nothing is matter. 4. Life, God, omnipotent good, deny death, evil, sin, disease. --Disease, sin, evil, death, deny good, omnipotent God, life.

The above quote was taken from chapter 6 in SCIENCE AND HEALTH: WITH KEY TO THE SCRIPTURES.

For the preceding quote check the word "science" in the index of the SCIENCE AND HEALTH. In my version it can be found on page 139.

More could be said, but I will stop for now.

[JoeMo]

I am in a band with an atheist (also a highly educated scientist). We had a talk last night about my faith and his evidence-based rationalism. He told me that most of the atheists he knows don't say "there is no God"; they say they "don't believe in God" or they "see no evidence of God". There is a difference. That was kind of an eye opener for me.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

He told me that most of the atheists he knows don't say "there is no God"; they say they "don't believe in God" or they "see no evidence of God". There is a difference.

Most interesting! Good to know.

[Bravus]

I think part of the moral of this story is 'Ask and listen, don't assume'. What atheists believe may not be what you might assume they believe.

[Bravus]

That's true for everyone, of course!

[Bravus]

The 'cheap shot' like 'How can you hate someone you don't believe in!' is a fairly terrible approach.

'Here's what I believe, and here's why - you may like to consider...' is a better one.

[Stan]

People can hate the God that has been sold to them, and can you blame them?

[Geoarrge]

I don't think, for most people, that the crux of the matter hinges on the historical accuracy of the Bible or any scientific evidence that our existence in this universe depends, at some level at least, on the existence of God.

These are the questions that matter: Is God actually there, in any real sense? Is anyone listening when we call out to God in times of need? Does it actually result in anything happening that would not have occurred anyway? Is it right to deliberately cultivate a confirmation bias such that no matter the results of our prayers, either God is granting our requests or teaching us a lesson? Scriptures contain stories about the distant past and promises about the indeterminate future, but is the God characterized therein actually around today? When someone describes a miracle happening in response to their prayers, is it a real act of divine intervention or just good luck? Why are other people in similar situations disappointed? In what sense can God be trusted, then?

Either God is there or He isn't. Once that question is settled, a person will be quite willing to entertain the other ideas that go along with it.

[JoeMo]

Geoarrge,

You ask some really good questions. My answer to all of them is I don't really KNOW. All I can say is that I have seen and experienced things that defy my understanding of the laws of nature. So personally, I BELIEVE; and am therefore biased towards the choices that include an active, personal, loving, and all-powerful God - maybe not exactly as one or another denomination would define that, but the One I see in Scripture and experience. But understandably, that doesn't impress most atheists.

[Sojourner]

Originally Posted By: Sojourner

Also for the fact that the Atheist movement in Australia are no slouches at picking off religious people to add to their ranks. We seem to have all the answers for what to say to Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons etc, but when speaking with Atheists we seem to have few resources or answers of any real substance.

That sounds like a competition, a war of words and philosophy to me. No good ever comes out of that. If the religious are being "picked off" by the atheists, then it sounds to me like the atheists have a better set of answers. So really rather than going to battle with them, why not just help to strengthen the beliefs of the religious. Or look at the atheists set of answers and study them. Maybe at the end you will discover that they have some good points. The biggest one being that those of us that believe in some supernatural esoteric higher powers(s) have no proof whatsoever of the existence of such a power other than our own gut feelings and personal experiences. If there is a deity out there that is all that concerned with the atheists I am fairly certain it will go ahead and convince then itself.

Originally Posted By: Sojourner

I also think that this quote from Charles Spurgeon is a good example of why its important to go after the lost as Christians, to simply not care at all is not in harmony with my own sense of spirituality.

""Have you no wish for others to be Saved?

Then you are not saved yourself,

Be sure of that!"

Charles H. Spurgeon.

That really just makes it sound like a person should be concerned about the "saving" of others for some very selfish reasons. From my perspective (and yours may certainly vary) that is a really bad reason.

Hi MT,

When you mention, strengthening the beliefs of the religious, this is not unlike what I had in mind in the OP. I love the discussion of theology and world religions and enjoy that with people from other faiths and belief systems. Aside from a small incursion into the Edgar Cayce movement at one time I have never really felt that my theology was ever under question from what I had learned elsewhere or been challenged with and it would be great if more Christians could do that and not feel under threat, yet sadly many do because their beliefs are perhaps weak in areas and if challenged by an Atheist, simply do not know what to say and have no real answers for why they believe what they do.

In terms of the Spurgeon quote, another good example is perhaps this illustration which you might have heard before – suppose you were walking on a road alongside the railway track and noticed that a friend of yours had fallen and knocked herself unconscious on the track. Knowing that express trains run down that track and cant pull up in time, would you not dash over and remove your friend from the track and effectively save her life in the process? Whilst this illustration is one of the common good in humanism, the implication is that Christians ideally feel the same way about people that are not saved and simply want them to be saved accordingly.

I know that the wicca-pagan movement can have elements within it that are strongly opposed to the teaching of Christianity that it is the only way and that they suggest that there are various valid spiritual pathways, so the issue of what someone else then believes is not overly critical. Yet from the born again evangelical view that is very much affirmed as I am guessing you are pretty used to hearing.

The problem that I have with the multiple ways view espoused by these people is the reality that goes with it. Accepting that suggests acceptance that there are multiple gods and deities that are openly out to get you unless via ritual or sacrifice or whatever that you are able to empower your own gods or the good side of the force to protect you and even then that is never guaranteed. The theology of Christ being the last ever sacrifice has set many people free from this ideal and into a place where they no longer live their lives in this type of fear or the suffering that goes with it. Clearly I am getting off topic, but I wanted to point out the underlying reasons for why I feel it is true that Christianity can be the only way as such and not just a way as many people might suggest.

[8thdaypriest]

Illustra Media has a very good collection of three DVDs in a set:

1. "Darwin's Dilemma" which is about the Cambrian layer

2. "Unlocking the Mystery Of Life" which is about DNA and genetics

3. "The Priviledged Planet"

I think it is still available at amazon.

I like Lee Stroble's material, but it doesn't go very deep.

A good magazine is "Creation". I subscribed for years.

www.AnswersinGenesis.org

The Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, Texas has some good material.

They have a website, with a "store".

Larry Vardiman Ph.D. wrote several research papers back in the '90

"Ice Cores and the Age of the Earth". pub 1996

"The Age of the Earth's Atmosphere" pub. 1990

"Sea Floor Sediment and the Age of the Earth" 1996

Course there is Dr. Morris.

For historical evidence of Jesus Christ, try O'Reilly's book "Killing Jesus".

It does not get religious. It just presents the available evidence.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

I know that the wicca-pagan movement can have elements within it that are strongly opposed to the teaching of Christianity that it is the only way and that they suggest that there are various valid spiritual pathways

"Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?” Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

“If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.”

Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? “Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. “Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves. “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father. “Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. “If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments. "

John 14:5-15 NASB

Anyone and everyone has the right to accept or reject these words. If I accept them the Lord of glory takes responsibility for my future. If I reject them, my future is on me and if the first weren't true, I haven't lost any thing. If they are true and I accept them I have beyond time and eternity to live in bliss.

To me it's a no-brainer. To the glory of God.

"Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." John 20:29 KJV

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I am in a band with an atheist (also a highly educated scientist). We had a talk last night about my faith and his evidence-based rationalism. He told me that most of the atheists he knows don't say "there is no God"; they say they "don't believe in God" or they "see no evidence of God". There is a difference. That was kind of an eye opener for me.

that sounds more like an agnostic, rather than an atheist..

[JoeMo]

Quote:

Dictionary.com

atheism: Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Quote:

Dictionary.com

atheism: Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

so that seems to confirm "agnostic" rather than "atheist"...

[pierrepaul]

That's the problem with terms like "atheist" and "agnostic" - meanings of words change over time. Agnostic used to denote a positive affirmation that it was impossible to know whether or not there is a God, without any implication as to what one believed. One could fervently believe in God while admitting that actual "knowledge" His existence was impossible; thus one could be theist and agnostic at the same time. Similarly, one could lack belief in God while admitting that actual knowledge of God's nonexistence was impossible, and thus be atheist and agnostic.

I don't know when the meaning of the term "agnostic" was de-natured to denote a sort of "half-way" position between atheism and theism.

[Tom Wetmore]

And then there is the book I am currently reading because of its intriguing title, "Why I am an Atheist Who Believes in God". It is written by Frank Schaeffer, son of the late Evangelical theologian and author, Francis Schaeffer.

[Igakusei]

That's the problem with terms like "atheist" and "agnostic" - meanings of words change over time. Agnostic used to denote a positive affirmation that it was impossible to know whether or not there is a God, without any implication as to what one believed. One could fervently believe in God while admitting that actual "knowledge" His existence was impossible; thus one could be theist and agnostic at the same time. Similarly, one could lack belief in God while admitting that actual knowledge of God's nonexistence was impossible, and thus be atheist and agnostic.

I don't know when the meaning of the term "agnostic" was de-natured to denote a sort of "half-way" position between atheism and theism.

Most atheists I know prefer to use your original definitions. With atheism referring to a lack of belief and agnostic referring to a lack of knowledge. I don't know if I've ever met a non-believer who wouldn't categorize himself as one of your agnostic atheists.

[8thdaypriest]

I'm reading "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design" by Jonathan Wells, Ph.D.

I think it's gonna turn out to be my favorite. It has LOTS of references to other ID and creationist books and authors, so it's a great resource.

In the "Politically INcorrect" series, there is also one on Global Warming. I'm gonna read that one next.

Blessings,

Rachel Cory

Prophecy Viewpoint